It won't work for everyone, but as a second car for city dwellers it looks great.

Share this story

The Eli Zero won't work for everyone, but I think it—and other vehicles like it—needs to play a part in our transportation future.

Eli

From the side view it looks like a cross between a Renault Twizy and Smart Car but better looking than either.

With a range of 55 or 85 miles, it should be perfect for day-to-day use in the city.

Eli

Those big glass doors mean it has great visibility.

Eli

You'll have to drive this yourself.

Eli

Listen to most mobility experts and they'll tell you the future of transportation involves connected, autonomous, shared electric vehicles. While it's true those should deliver some benefits—like fewer crashes and less CO2 in the atmosphere—there's not actually much evidence that autonomous cars will solve problems like congestion. Sure, you might be able to watch TV or work during your commute, but you'll still be stuck in a car for hours every day. Which is why a new neighborhood electric vehicle (NEV) called the Eli Zero caught my attention recently.

NEVs certainly aren't the answer for everyone; if you're the sort of person who has a 50-mile commute on a freeway every day, you might as well stop reading now because they won't solve any of your problems. But for people who live and work in denser urban areas whose commute or trip to the grocery store sticks to roads with city-appropriate speed limits, or who live in planned communities like Celebration, Florida, a NEV can start to make a lot of sense.

But what is an NEV? It's a low-speed vehicle certified for road use but limited to roads with speed limits of 45mph (72km/h) or less. The most common NEVs are road-legal golf carts, or something like the Global Electric Motorcar, or the adorable Renault Twizy (which is common in Europe but not available here in the US). And the Eli Zero looks a lot more compelling than any of those vehicles.

The specs are pretty simple. It's a two-seater, with side-by-side seating, as opposed to the tandem format of the Twizy. And unlike the Twizy, GEM, or a golf cart, it's fully enclosed, which means it's vastly more attractive to people living in places where it rains or snows. It uses a 4kW (5.3hp) electric motor powered by a 6kWh lithium-ion battery, which gives the Zero a range of 55 miles (89km), with a recharging time of 4.5 hours at 110V. A version with a bigger battery, the Zero+, will have a range of 85 miles (137km) thanks to a larger 8.3kWh pack—though this increases charging time to a still-reasonable six hours.

"It's not just small and compact but also energy-efficient," said Marcus Li, Eli's founder. "We make it understandable by saying to customers that it will do 85 clean miles at only $1, assuming 12c/kWh. And in our latest tests, we've been getting 350MPGe." For context, the highest EPA-rated city MPGe we can find is the Hyundai Ionic Electric at 150MPGe, followed by the Tesla Model 3 at 136MPGe.

"It's extremely high compared to conventional EVs. But that makes sense; it's 40 percent smaller than a Smart Car. We use an aluminum chassis to reduce vehicle weight without sacrificing structural integrity," Li said. (The Zero weighs 877lbs (398kg), or 904lbs (410kg) for the bigger battery version.) "Our battery is only 8.5kWh, but it goes 85 miles. An electric Smart car has a 20kWh battery for the same range—half of a car's energy goes to power its own weight, and when you optimize it to running at lower speed, you can get a lot of mileage out of a small battery," he explained.

Visually, the Zero looks like a cross between a Smart Car and a Twizy, particularly when looked at in profile. "When you fit the ergonomics and people and make it small, you automatically have limitations to the profile. We call the Smart Car a city car, and Smart has been educating the market for a long time; we're really respectful to people's familiarity with that form factor," Li told me.

Refreshingly for a new EV startup, there's no mention of any self-driving capability. That's because Li—whose background is in architecture and urban planning—also believes that technology isn't going to solve congestion. "For urban planning, autonomous is worse for traffic because it competes with subways and buses and also encourages more long-distance trips—ultimately brings more cars onto the road. It won't make two-hour solo commutes any easier and locks people into car dependence," he told me.

Although the Zero isn't eligible for the IRS' IRC30D tax credit, California's Air Resources Board has been in contact with the company about offering a $1,000 rebate in the state; previously it had resisted offering that credit, as other NEVs have used lead-acid batteries, Li explained.

Eli is in the process of tooling up for production now and hopes to be able to deliver the first vehicles in early 2019. MSRP is $10,900, but it looks like there are pretty good discounts for preorders.

209 Reader Comments

I could see this on local residential roads in the Chicagoland suburbs. Moving people to and from schools, supermarkets, banks and post offices.

No chance in hell that thing survives on the congested, rage-filled interstate freeways around here. Even the chances it survives the "mean streets" of the Chicago Loop area are slim. It does not look built for urban thoroughfares.

Given the history of Smart Car flipping even in the Bay Area, yeah somehow I doubt it.

Plus as others mentioned, people barely have room to park a first car, where are they going to find space for this? My town has resorted to building municipal multi-story garages and we still don't have enough room.

Parking is already hard to find in the city, or costs a good bit. I can see this in the suburbs as a 3rd car though.

My wife works in a city and has a Smart Car with commercial plates so she can park in resident parking for free for most of the day. She regularly finds spots where she can squeeze her car into that SUV's, etc. have to pass by. If more city dwellers swapped their behemoths for something smaller like this thing or a Smart Car, etc. then you'd be able to pack a lot more parking into the city neighborhoods.

This raises the same concern a lot of people had with smartcars when they released: How is this thing gunna fair in a collision with all those titanic SUVs and trucks? Smartcars dealt with it by consolidating all of their weight into an insanely durable frame, but does this have the same consideration? Thats a really paltry engine and its hard to imagine the body of the vehicle has much of anything going on if its going to be propelled by that.

Parking is already hard to find in the city, or costs a good bit. I can see this in the suburbs as a 3rd car though.

My wife works in a city and has a Smart Car with commercial plates so she can park in resident parking for free for most of the day. She regularly finds spots where she can squeeze her car into that SUV's, etc. have to pass by. If more city dwellers swapped their behemoths for something smaller like this thing or a Smart Car, etc. then you'd be able to pack a lot more parking into the city neighborhoods.

Whatever will Accountant Bob do without his personal 18-wheeler though?

The fundamental problem with our current model of private cars with owner/operators is that when the operator isn’t actually driving - which for the vast majority of us car owners is most of the time - the car has to be parked somewhere accessible. Replace that with a vehicle that can operate itself, then at the very least it can go off and park itself somewhere out of the way (if you keep the owner part of the equation), or better still go off and service someone else when you don’t need it (if you go with pooled use)

I could see this on local residential roads in the Chicagoland suburbs. Moving people to and from schools, supermarkets, banks and post offices.

No chance in hell that thing survives on the congested, rage-filled interstate freeways around here. Even the chances it survives the "mean streets" of the Chicago Loop area are slim. It does not look built for urban thoroughfares.

EDIT:There are potholes big enough to swallow the Eli. :\

I dont know, given how small it is, I dont see it as an ideal people mover or grocery getter

Parking is already hard to find in the city, or costs a good bit. I can see this in the suburbs as a 3rd car though.

My wife works in a city and has a Smart Car with commercial plates so she can park in resident parking for free for most of the day. She regularly finds spots where she can squeeze her car into that SUV's, etc. have to pass by. If more city dwellers swapped their behemoths for something smaller like this thing or a Smart Car, etc. then you'd be able to pack a lot more parking into the city neighborhoods.

Yeah... Car ownership in bigger cities are already way lower than surrounding suburb cities.... This isn't gonna change any of that. Most people don't have commercial plates either.

Things like this are fairly common in Europe, although from what I saw front/rear 1+1 seat was more common than the side-by-side seating here. Saw plenty of them in Zurich and Amsterdam last summer, frequently parked at bicycle/scooter (Vespa not Bird) parking.

Well, until those sell for 5k$ or less, I don’t see any reason to buy that. Urban peeps have only one car (when they have one).It’s as expensive as a pretty good and capable used car and you can’t fit anything in it...About the twizzy : I used to drive one at work dozens of times and it’s a nightmare : no comfort, bad breaking hability, plastic windows...

“there's not actually much evidence that autonomous cars will solve problems like congestion“

While I don’t completely disagree, I can also see the advantages. If they talk to each other and have better driving skills it means: fewer wrecks, potentially faster speeds, safer tailgating and potential chains,, better traffic avoidance, consistent speeds,etc. Also they don’t slow down to gawk at the wreck on the other side of the highway, brake for no reason, and the list goes on. Seems like good case for at least partially alleviating congestion.

Parking is already hard to find in the city, or costs a good bit. I can see this in the suburbs as a 3rd car though.

But even in the suburbs this doesn't look like a great option. Between folks driving 50+ down connecting roads and the limited practicality for someone with kids, why bother with this for a third car when you could get something used for the same price that would be more useful.

Even though the size would be better than a traditional car, it isn't like I can get this through my gate to park in the back yard - so I still need to make space in the driveway or garage.

For what this is providing I'd rather save some cash and join the senior brigade on a golf cart, get an electric bike, or put the money towards something else.

Cons: LSV's don't have to meet most car safety standards. Don't crash. Won't handle wind well (thin tires, large profile, low weight). The obvious: Low top speed makes it useless for some people.

An interesting vehicle, but I'm not sure I'm willing to risk my safety by driving around in a glorified golf cart just to save money. I'm sure some will, particularly if dense area traffic makes high speed collisions basically impossible.

Also, is it going to actually come to market? I suppose that's a pretty large concern. Lots of things like this end up just being 'vaporware'.

Parking is already hard to find in the city, or costs a good bit. I can see this in the suburbs as a 3rd car though.

My wife works in a city and has a Smart Car with commercial plates so she can park in resident parking for free for most of the day. She regularly finds spots where she can squeeze her car into that SUV's, etc. have to pass by. If more city dwellers swapped their behemoths for something smaller like this thing or a Smart Car, etc. then you'd be able to pack a lot more parking into the city neighborhoods.

Whatever will Accountant Bob do without his personal 18-wheeler though?

Hey man, I use my 10000 pound truck that one time to pick up that 20 pound bag of rice. I *need* my truck.

Parking is already hard to find in the city, or costs a good bit. I can see this in the suburbs as a 3rd car though.

But even in the suburbs this doesn't look like a great option. Between folks driving 50+ down connecting roads and the limited practicality for someone with kids, why bother with this for a third car when you could get something used for the same price that would be more useful.

Even though the size would be better than a traditional car, it isn't like I can get this through my gate to park in the back yard - so I still need to make space in the driveway or garage.

For what this is providing I'd rather save some cash and join the senior brigade on a golf cart, get an electric bike, or put the money towards something else.

Because they already have another SUV or etc for the daily commute and longer trips? The 3rd car would just be for cruising around locally.

When autonomous vehicles are in charge of driving and collisions are things of the past maybe I'll consider this. However, even limited to 45 mph roads, a head-on collision with an SUV that weighs 8 times what this does (see Ford Excursion) is effectively hitting a brick wall at 80 mph.

Driving is already the most dangerous thing the average person does on a daily basis. I don't see the need to needlessly increase the dangers further.

If only that bottom door area were re-inforced with something, anything, other than just glass/plastic. Tube frame aluminum would have looked nice around that area. I like the concept of these cars but the realities of other cars bumping into you makes a design like this no better than a motorcycle.

Given the history of Smart Car flipping even in the Bay Area, yeah somehow I doubt it.

Plus as others mentioned, people barely have room to park a first car, where are they going to find space for this? My town has resorted to building municipal multi-story garages and we still don't have enough room.

It looks like it might be small enough to park "nose in" to a lot of parking spots on city streets that regular cars won't fit into (places that usually only motorcycles will park). So I'd guess for an urban dweller, this might be pretty attractive in terms of finding parking spots on the street.. Also, it can probably squeeze into spots in some urban garages (under the house), making it a great second car b/c you can't otherwise fit a second car into some of those garages. At least that's my experience in San Francisco.

This raises the same concern a lot of people had with smartcars when they released: How is this thing gunna fair in a collision with all those titanic SUVs and trucks? Smartcars dealt with it by consolidating all of their weight into an insanely durable frame, but does this have the same consideration? Thats a really paltry engine and its hard to imagine the body of the vehicle has much of anything going on if its going to be propelled by that.

Probably badly, but any collisions would be at relatively low speed since you can't drive this thing on roads with speed limits above 45mph.

Parking is already hard to find in the city, or costs a good bit. I can see this in the suburbs as a 3rd car though.

My wife works in a city and has a Smart Car with commercial plates so she can park in resident parking for free for most of the day. She regularly finds spots where she can squeeze her car into that SUV's, etc. have to pass by. If more city dwellers swapped their behemoths for something smaller like this thing or a Smart Car, etc. then you'd be able to pack a lot more parking into the city neighborhoods.

Yeah... Car ownership in bigger cities are already way lower than surrounding suburb cities.... This isn't gonna change any of that. Most people don't have commercial plates either.

I live in Boston and I've heard stories that there's a wealthy couple in the South End (a pretty $$$ neighborhood) that has 5 cars and they have resident permits for all of them. A lot of neighbors are apparently pretty pissed that they're taking up a bunch of parking spaces all the time. Parking around here is so tight that people will risk parking in front of hydrants (sometimes with really bad results), will vandalize cars in the wintertime if they park in a spot that somebody else shoveled out and thereby "claimed", etc.

The ability to park more cars in Boston, both in residential areas as well as public areas, would be a huge boon to the city. Perhaps they should just start painting some percentage of spots for cars this small and aggressively ticket oversized cars that park in them. That might incentivize more folks to get smaller cars in the city.

Honestly I think saying this could solve congestion is straying a bit too far into hyperbole. It's still a car, right? It's just a smaller car. It still takes up space. You can't justify this as a primary vehicle either, since all it can really do is short-range grocery trips, a daily commute, or a short trip with just one other person. People buying this would generally have to have another vehicle.

I mean, it might at least help reduce energy consumption in middle-density suburban neighborhoods where people have the space to keep more than one car, but everything is far enough apart that public transportation is less efficient. Still, that's kind of a long shot.

So, in summary: neat toy, but I don't see it being too useful.

Edit: Also, something I just though of -- most vehicles are rated higher than the speed limit for a reason. You generally need more oomph than you're going to use in order to accelerate and handle weight safely. Does this thing have enough power to drive in a safe manner on, say, a 35mph road? What about 45mph? These types of roads are pretty common in semi-dense urban areas.